September 22, 2020

Rationalizers are not credible persons, so their claims are not credible. They pick an irrelevancy that promotes their purpose, while surrounding realities contradict them. They don't have enough awareness to recognize the surrounding contradictions. It's the contradictions that show the difference between rationalizing and producing rationality.

Rationalizing is using fake logic to promote fraud. It's like saying a rock and a stick are the same things, because they are both made of molecules. Irrelevancies wipe out the correct logic.

As Trump and the conservatives replace democratic government with totalitarian fascism, they use fake logic to rationalize their criminality.

Journalists are supposed to fill in the missing realities. They haven't been. They allowed the rationalizing of frauds to take over a society and turn it into fascism.

For legal purposes, the courts were supposed to correct the fake logic of rationalizing by aligning laws upon purposes or intent. Conservatives stack the courts with conservatives trying to defy the logic of purposes and intent.

Conservatives are showing us that the purpose of conservatives is to amass the power of the group in opposition to rationality and laws. The polarization of partisan politics which gridlocks government is not two equal sides in a dispute. It's a conservative attack upon laws and rationality, while opponents try to salvage a democratic government.

Conservatives do everything through fraudulent rationalizing. It's always fraud, because the purpose of conservatives is fraud which needs to be rationalized. Their purpose is to create the power of a group by stripping laws from democratic government and reducing government to the whims of totalitarian dictators. Ignoring the purpose and misrepresentations is a secondary fraud.

An example is that Florida voters created a law that said convicted felons are allowed to vote. The Republican government then said the persons are not allowed to vote if they have unpaid fines or fees, which most do. Such conditions could be tacked onto any law to negate it, which is rationalism. It's no different in substance from Jim Crow laws. A legislature or dictator could say, any black person who dropped a penny on the ground is not allowed to vote. Courts were supposed to correct such frauds by aligning laws upon purposes, but conservatives stacked the courts attempting to produce frauds which do not do what courts are supposed to do.

Another example is that conservatives insisted that Obama's appointee for the Supreme Court would not be approved during an election year—a totally arbitrary negation of laws (a rationalization). Then when Trump appoints a judge, the claim is reversed saying it should only apply to a mixed government (Republican Senate and Democratic president). That's like saying a person cannot vote if he has mixed race genetics—reversing purposes through fake logic.

In other words, any reality could be reversed or justified through fake logic, which is rationalizing. That's why laws are supposed to be based upon intent. Intent doesn't change with fake logic. But it takes real courts to determine and apply the rule of intent. So conservatives stack the courts with conservatives for the purpose of turning the logic and intent of laws into mockeries.

Part of why frauds get by with frauds is because the abstract realities are not well developed. There are basic realities which determine the difference between fraud and objective reality. Journalists and too many other persons have been leaving basic realities untouched, in part because frauds say they are supposed to. Pandering to frauds is why the problem exists.

Getting the perspective wrong is part of the problem. Small mindedness looks only at the fake truisms and assume they are irrefutable. Such persons don't look at the missing realities that correct the frauds.

One reason why that happens is because there are too few persons doing the correcting and too many frauds overwhelming them. It's quite noticeable that the persons doing the correcting get shoved aside and into the background. Opinion columns are an example. They reach very few people with the corrections. Few of the general public ever see the corrections.

The examples are endless and extremely clear in fake science and technology. Real scientists and engineers have made corrections over and over to no avail. They get ignored until they give up. They are massively overwhelmed by frauds.

Carbon dioxide heating the planet is a ludicrous concept. One molecule surrounded by 2,500 different molecules is not going to determine the temperature of the atmosphere. Most people cannot evaluate that fact, so they are overwhelmed by the frauds on the subject.

The engineering frauds are even more visible and imposing. Renewable energy flat out destroys environments and wastes resources, while fakes get by with lying about it. There wouldn't be enough space on the surface of the earth to produce 100% renewable energy due to the wires alone, besides the contraptions. The costs are getting prohibitive at 1-3% renewables. Californians pay three times as much for electricity largely due to renewables. The British and Germans pay about ten times more for electricity due to renewables at 15% of their electricity.

Instead of journalists correcting the frauds, they are primarily to blame for advancing the frauds. They brought fraudulent science to the surface and suppressed real science.

It's not that journalists are more corrupt than anyone else; it's that they have the primary responsibility for determining the realities of society, while they fail to meet the requirements for evaluating the abstract basics which frauds lie about.

Frauds have reduced the argument over carbon dioxide to one point only: It's the fraudulent claim that 97% of the scientists agree, which is not true, while agreement itself is fraud in science.

Similarly, frauds have reduced the argument over renewable energy to one point only: It's the fraudulent claim that renewables are on par with coal. Coal powered electricity costs about 4¢ per kilowatt hour, while renewable-sourced electricity costs about 50¢ pkwh at 15% renewables.

That's called rationalizing. It's a fraud upon the public. It should be correctable in journalism just like grammatical errors. The slightest look at surrounding realities exposes the frauds. There are critics that do that. They are shoved aside, ridiculed and often shoved out of their jobs, with journalists having the primary responsibility for the results.